Matt u say there should be more h'caps and less Group races but if u look at how many runners each trainer had

1 You 145
2 Roe 181
3 Me 137
4 Rann 193
5 Rhodes 209

11 Brown 231
12 Dean 205
12 Clutterbuck 188
14 Thompson 234
15 Cairns 200
26 Follis 206
28 Driver 214

The top trainers has less opportunity than the middle trainers plus u say the smaller trainers got to run their horses in group races, but how many of them want to run in group races. Everyone/most wants to have a runner in the big races.

I can talk about being one of the smaller trainers because I was one the season before last, I didn't think for a moment to give up even though I was finishing last, that speaks more for the person than it say's about this game. That's what makes this game great, u put in the time and u can go from the back to the front.

I can replace Group races with more handicaps but I cant just slice off group races without other trainers feed back and which group races to cut look at the thirteen week schedule and go by week by week tell me which group race to chop. I will cut the free Handicap at Newmarket I find a handicap to replace it.

Matt have a look and suggest then other trainers can agree or not agree with you or any one else this includes the small trainers on the Kentucky derby moving it forward matt I will have a look when I have enough time because if I do starting switching races around I will need time.

Gray

I see I had 188 runners I had a full stable but my horses wasn't that good and I didn't just throw my horses into group races as I knew it would be pointless but some trainers like to run horses into big races and that is up to them but looking at that table it shows small trainers had a few races to run in.

I missed the first two weeks and didn't have any 2yo's, I also only had a stable of 13 horses which ran regularly. So that means those horses had 9+ runs each. Not bad for 11 weeks of racing!!!! Surely that means there are too many races for the top trainers? You chose not to enter your horses every week, that does not mean they didn't have races to run in so you should not try to mislead the facts. You could have had over 160 races, maybe even 180. Over 200 is a lot and imo too much for top trainers.

Obviously you've looked at where the middle and lower trainers entered their horses? You have?

Highest rated and mean average of horses in stable:

Brown 117 92
Dean 115 97
Clutterbuck 108 93
Thompson 114 83
Cairns 120 98
Follis 95 79
Driver 107 78

So it would seem that despite having more runners these trainers have a lesser class of horse meaning they have little chance of winning the Group races. And the average of their stable would struggle to win a Listed race. Therefore they NEED handicaps. Thats not just my opinion its proven by the horses ratings. You will also see that a large percentage of their runners were running in Group races not through choice, but as it was their only option. This also leads to their horses being given inflated handicap ratings meaning they have less chances of winning a handicap when the time comes round. Or worse case being above the rating band. Bad horse placement is one thing and will happen every season but to not give trainers an alternative to a Group race is completely unfair.

Now compare how many winners the top trainers had compared to those at the bottom. Obviously they have better horses but they also have two or three times the opportunities. I think last season there were more 10 and 12f G1 races than there were low class handicaps altogether. That seems fair?

Then you speak for everyone and say they want to have runners in Group races. Driver and Follis have both said on this forum that they were entering their horses into Group races as they had no other options. They would like more handicaps. Again thats not just my opinion they have both stated that. There wasn't a 10f 3yo handicap until week 5 last season. How many Group races had there been over that distance by week 5? 5,10,15,20?

There are also people who have said they are giving up because they have very few opportunities to win races. And I dont disagree with them. You learn a lot in your first season but not if you dont have a chance of winning races. Do we want the league to grow or for people to think this is crap and leave?

Lastly you say "you put in the time and you can go from the back to the front." And for those that dont have the time to do that? Is it just tough and wish them the best of luck? Again that is completely unfair. The league is supposed to be for everyone. Not just those who have the time and skill to breed the best horses. Or maybe Im wrong? Maybe the league is now elitist?

Gray a lot of your stable did run in Group races, I've just looked. And you cant just say the table says small trainers had races to run in because it doesn't!

Other trainers can agree or not agree? The only people commenting are the top trainers who imo are selfish.

Ignoring Meydan, which should remain unchanged, Week 2 has;
6f 3yo Listed
7f 3yo G3 Fillies
7f 3yo G3 Colts
7f 4+ Listed
8f 3yo G3 Colts
9f 3yo Listed
10f 3yo Listed

Now tell me how many handicaps there are in the same week in TOTAL?

We have already touched on week 2 matt which is mostly made up of maidens but if other trainers want more Handicaps in week 2 with horse's only having one run i am willing to change the maidens into handicaps that is if everyone else wants to do that.

Gray

So you are forcing them to run in Listed or Group races then? The other option is they dont run and then they will still only have one run before entering a handicap? There will always be well handicapped horses after one or two maiden runs. Its better to get them into handicaps sooner rather than later.

Did you realise how many of your horses did run in Group races, Gray? A few only ran in Group or listed races.

Matt u had a stable of 16 and u missed the first week.

Matt perhaps U should come up with a Schedule then people could decide for themselves what's best.

Matt u say there wasn't a 3yo 1m2f h'cap race before week 5,in week 2 there was one also in week 3 there was a 1m1f race and in week 4 there was a 1m2f 3yo race

U say u only learn if u win, well I won 3 races in 180 races, I didn't do to bad the next season

I counted 29 1m2-1m4 h'capps compered to 24 group 1.

I have never seen anyone come in here and say they are quitting because they can't win races, if there is then they should come in here and say.

U need the maidens in week 2 to give a chance to run all u horses in a maiden.

You learn a lot in your first season but not if you dont have a chance of winning races......Matt

I won three but most of the time I finished last, u still learn when u finish Last.

There wasn't a 10f 3yo handicap until week 5 last season. How many Group races had there been over that distance by week 5? 5,10,15,20? You Said that....

Nothing About 90 rated horses

So you have twisted my words, thats clever. However its very common on this forum.

You won three races. I said if you dont have a chance of winning races. Thats not the same is it?

Well you seem open to fair debate. I said sorry for missing out the 91 horses. I'll write it again.....


If you had a 3yo 1m2 rated 91-110 there were no races until week SEVEN. Whereas a Group class horse could run every week. Thats fair and balanced is it?